Uh, what? It's pretty easy to find these: http://www.i-comp.org/ (Microsoft funded, run by Burson-Marsteller of the facebook fiasco.). "When evil needs public relations, evil has Burson-Marsteller on speed-dial." - Rachel Maddow

Now that you're done with a sarcastic response, perhaps you'd actually like to respond to the issue. Florian Muller has, in the last week alone, tried to scare up a bogus "serious Linux copyright threat" and got roundly slapped down as inane. He clearly no understanding of copyright law, patent law, Linux or Andriod. Why slashdot keeps posting his blog as if he was an expert on these is baffling.

Why does slashdot keep posting Florian Muller's inane anti-Andriod ramblings? Surely if there is such a looming threat, someone besides a repeatedly discredited hack has to be writing about it.

Here's a better dissection of Google's letter: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110216210828960

Some choice parts excluded from the OP's articles:

> materials identified by Oracle as infringing in fact created by a third party and released into the public domain

> the only two files allegedly containing "copied" code were created by Google and provided to Oracle for use in open source releases of Java

... except for that whole thing about it being a logical fallacy.

Except Google did offer real searches where they thought they were the deciding factor: "torsoraphy". The "Bing String" showed that Microsoft's algorithm would republish Google's search results as their own. There's no way outside of reviewing Bing's algorithm and logs how many real search results are "powered by Google".